It's not Sherwood!

[Gregorys Boy]

I don't get it with Sherwood.

I admit that I know next to nothing about football, I just love the Villa and have done for 50 years. But even I could see that at 2-0 up you don't put on strikers for midfielders.

I'm not sure he is capable of learning from his mistakes, his ego is getting in the way.

This is one of my concerns.  As a manager being single minded can be a good thing, but you can never be too single minded.  Sherwood deserves the chance to prove himself though.  But I too have doubts.

[olaftab]

I was shocked by the way Gary Monk outsmarted him in the second half at Villa Park last season and won the game. If I wasn't sure before that game convinced me that he is an  another Kevin Keegan in the making. So far this season Pardew and Advocaat have done him and now the Tinker man yesterday.

[Gregorys Boy]

I was shocked by the way Gary Monk outsmarted him in the second half at Villa Park last season and won the game. If I wasn't sure before that game convinced me that he is an  another Kevin Keegan in the making. So far this season Pardew and Advocaat have done him and now the Tinker man yesterday.

First off all I think Sherwood did himself yesterday (and the players played a part too).  I don't think it was much which Mr Tinker man did, its not rocket silence putting on someone like Dyer to change the game and they were always going to improve second half.  It was more Sherwood getting his subs wrong and our players collasping.  Pardew is a seasoned top flight boss, Monk is impressive too, and Advocaat is very experience, so think you are being a little unfair on Sherwood with those ones.

[AVH87]

I was shocked by the way Gary Monk outsmarted him in the second half at Villa Park last season and won the game. If I wasn't sure before that game convinced me that he is an  another Kevin Keegan in the making. So far this season Pardew and Advocaat have done him and now the Tinker man yesterday.

Yesterday's subs and second half tactics were a concern, but did Advocaat really do him? They scored a long-range free kick and Clark made a clanger, we dominated most of that game.

[Ads]

Monk outsmarted van Gaal too and is clearly no mug. Monk in turn was out foxed by Watford's movement at the weekend.

I am not sure any manager in H&V's history has suffered such scrutiny over his tactical approach. He's made errors, point them out, there is little need for bending the truth.

[Gregorys Boy]

Monk outsmarted van Gaal too and is clearly no mug. Monk in turn was out foxed by Watford's movement at the weekend.

I am not sure any manager in H&V's history has suffered such scrutiny over his tactical approach. He's made errors, point them out, there is little need for bending the truth.

I take it the point you are making is that you can't always judge a manager's ability based on one off games? If so I agree.

[Ads]

A point I have made is that for all the sage talk about tactical nous, if Lescott chins the ball down the line in the 73rd minute for Sinclair to chase, then we don't concede the first goal and time ticks on that little further and we more than likely win the game.

We've been architects of our own downfall at the past two away games; Guzan, Amavi, Lescott, Bacuna and Guzan again. Basic, fundamental errors, more than any ability or lack thereof to respond to Palace or Leicester doing the exact same thing they'd been trying to do all game, has cost us 4 points.

[Monty]

Monk outsmarted van Gaal too and is clearly no mug. Monk in turn was out foxed by Watford's movement at the weekend.

I am not sure any manager in H&V's history has suffered such scrutiny over his tactical approach. He's made errors, point them out, there is little need for bending the truth.

Now now, you can't say TacTim has been singled out. I think relentless scrutiny of tactics has become the norm on here - unsurprising, when you look at the Grand Old Dicks of York we've had marching our troops up and down various hills (or maybe I should say David Leslies, given our recent spate of incompetent Scottish tacticians).

Tim has a specific problem, and one which is really quite amazing: he's very good indeed at setting up a team from the start, and sometimes he makes inspired first team choices, but he's the worst manager at substitutions I think I've ever seen, with the possible exception of MON. He very rarely changes the game in our favour, and sometimes makes us considerably worse. It's a very odd problem.

[Drummond]

I'm not sure I agree with the subs either. It was a tad early to bring them on for the experience if that was his thinking.

However, we had looked good up front, I like the look of Richards and Lescott, and there is more to come from our creative players.

Traore would have made a big difference yesterday  down the right, and would have kept them more defensive, and Gueye also would have strengthened us.

Right back is weak, goalkeeper is weak, centre forward is weak.

Sherwood made an odd choice or two, which is a shame. However, I think he'll learn and we'll progress. It's still far too early in his tenure to call it though.

[mr underhill]

is it though? If you combine the tail end of last season with the beginning of this one, his record is far from encouraging

[Gregorys Boy]

I think two things.  One is as long as Sherwood learns from his mistakes then its not a problem, and the other is that because he picks the team and the tactics that he still has to take part of the can for individual mistakes. 

[Chico Hamilton III]

It might be too early to judge him ( although if we'd won 6 of the last 8 instead of losing them I'm sure we'd all be calling him a genius) but we need to beat Albion and Blues in the next 10 days or his honeymoon will be over. That's the way it works.

[Ads]

I’m not sure I would agree he’s any better or any worse.

Tony Pulis seems incapable of making a sub to affect the game in a positive way at the moment.

I think those that made their minds up, like Dave and Mark to name perhaps the two most vocal back in February, will always be the first to point the finger whenever we don’t achieve 3 points.

There are criticisms to be made, but there are two occasions where he has made substitutions and they’ve worked this season; Bournemouth and Palace.

What do you mean, Palace?! I mean the substitution he made that got us a point until individual errors from Amavi and Guzan cost us in the 84th minute when the game was petering out to a draw.

Yesterday I would have myself brought on Veretout and played a flat three, 10 yards higher up, brought Hutton on for Bacuna and injury/legs permitting, spread Gabby and Sinclair wide respectively to tuck in.

But then I wouldn’t be counting on, and perhaps as a Villa fan for the past 25 years I really should have, Lescott* to lack the nous he has in abundance to play the percentage ball.

For all of Westwood and Sanchez failing to pick up runners second half, you cannot escape the fact that for all Leicester’s second half surge, up until we gifted them with the situation for the 1st goal, they’d been contained by the back four at least. One long range effort from Mahrez, one weak header a mile wide, Vardy being smothered by Richards after being put through.

Show me a goal and I will show you a mistake; that phrase was made for us. Leicester’s 1st and 3rd in particular, were absolutely woeful. Dd that to Sunderland and Palace’s second goals too.

Talk about systems and substitutions all you like, there is undoubted mileage in that. But if you have players capable of such moments of gross stupidity, then its going to hurt you.

[QuintonVilla]

Tactically he is very naive. Is it lack of experience or lack of ability? An astute manager would have seen that game out yesterday, his subs were all wrong and cost us. The FA Cup Final showed how naive he is aswell, ok Arsenal played well but tactically we were awful again. We need to hope it's just lack of experience and that he learns very quickly. One win from these opening games is poor, it hasn't exactly been the toughest start on paper. The Albion game is even bigger now and if we get into a lead he needs to make the correct decisions, although it's not all his fault as our players bottled it as soon as Leicester had a go.

[in exile]

I'm not sure I agree with the subs either. It was a tad early to bring them on for the experience if that was his thinking.
Sherwood made an odd choice or two, which is a shame. However, I think he'll learn and we'll progress. It's still far too early in his tenure to call it though.

What about the roles of Messers Robson, Parkes & Wilkins...does Sherwood not bounce ideas off his staff before changes are made?